Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

You can talk about almost anything here

Moderators: John@sos, charlesp, Charles uk, RickUK, Petergalileo

User avatar
charlesp
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:37 pm
Location: Poole, Dorset, England

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by charlesp »

A measurement of the height of the flywheel centre may prove instructive.
User avatar
Collector Inspector
Posts: 4182
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:32 am
Location: Perth Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Collector Inspector »

Instructive? Height of flywheel this one (SD4726L3)is the same as my others within reach (SD6226L3 and SD9588L4) +/- 0.5mm.

B
Attachments
15072012169.jpg
A chicken is one egg's way of becoming others
Beagle2
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:01 pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Beagle2 »

Thanks for all the replies everyone.

Crank measurements:

My top crank measurements come up slightly under? If they were the same the flywheel would sit even higher (!). However, I have seen differences between cranks before. I have a Century crank, which is approx 4mm shorter overall.

18.82 - 14.4
33.19 - 28.0
41.11 - 37.5
8.16 - 9.8
12.43 - 11.3
7.41 - 6.9

The lower measurements seem to be the same

6.31 - 6.4
34.76 - 34.1

Flywheel measurement

Slightly lower, between 45.1mm and 45.5mm

Oysters pics:

"These are my two SDs, plus a pic of one now sold. Quite a variation between the three" - yes quite a bit!

I forgot to mention my SD has no locating 'dimple'. If I move my base plate up a bit, it looks very similar to Oyster's first pic. I imagine I'll have to somehow set the timing manually?

I seed no evidence of the crank-case being machined / altered. My crank-case doesn't have "Seagull" cast into it, so I imagine it is an earlier version.
IMG_3825.JPG
The washer seems a like a bit of an later bodge. The inner diameter doesn't match. Furthermore, it is uneven and wobbles when the base-plate is installed above.

I'm hoping that I just have a particularly 'high' sitting flywheel.
40 Minus SJM27515
102 SD2527L3
User avatar
charlesp
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:37 pm
Location: Poole, Dorset, England

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by charlesp »

I meant the height of the one that has the washer - I'm wondering if the bashing around the rim may have flattened the dished top.
User avatar
Collector Inspector
Posts: 4182
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:32 am
Location: Perth Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Collector Inspector »

Well, lots of measuring above, who knows where it will sort out.

Classic questions and info this post..........love it

Regards

B
A chicken is one egg's way of becoming others
User avatar
Oyster 49
Posts: 3311
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:55 pm
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Oyster 49 »

Looking at that crankcase casting, it does not seem quite "right" if you know what I mean. There are differences in the detail of the casting. Could you actually have a pre SD pair of crankcases there? This is a picture of a SD upper crankcase half, spot the differences? The lack of "Seagull" cast into the case is intriguing :o
Attachments
106_0865.jpg
Beagle2
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:01 pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Beagle2 »

Hmmm. I don't know. Here are some more pictures. The cases certainly seem to match; maybe they were left over pre SD?

Maybe pre SD the crank was slightly different- hence con-rod bolts scraping on the inner crank-case?
Attachments
IMG_3829.JPG
IMG_3828.JPG
40 Minus SJM27515
102 SD2527L3
User avatar
Charles uk
Posts: 4954
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:38 pm
Location: Maidenhead Berks UK

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Charles uk »

There's another question for the SD registration form.
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Horsley-Anarak
Posts: 2838
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Horsley-Anarak »

My SD is only about 300 away from yours, it is also an L3.

There is no seagull on the crankcae on mine.

Perhaps the 3 after the L means something, could be a different factory perhaps.

Does yours have the Skeg stamp?

H-A
Beagle2
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:01 pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Beagle2 »

Hi, yes mine has a skeg stamp: "CIESS <- G 232", gearbox stamped 35, gearbox cover stamped 34.

I'm actually replacing this box with one from Oyster. The gear pinion was badly chipped
40 Minus SJM27515
102 SD2527L3
Beagle2
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:01 pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Beagle2 »

charlesp wrote:I meant the height of the one that has the washer - I'm wondering if the bashing around the rim may have flattened the dished top.

Sorry Charles, missed your post. Height of flywheel center is 60.1mm
40 Minus SJM27515
102 SD2527L3
User avatar
Hugz
Posts: 3282
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:41 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Hugz »

My early (125) also has seagull on the case.
Attachments
SDNavalnumber.jpg
SDCase.jpg
User avatar
Collector Inspector
Posts: 4182
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:32 am
Location: Perth Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Collector Inspector »

Is that a washer/spacer in that pic Huggy?

OR

Is it the split bush end.

There is a split bush in the casting of the backing plate, it can be moved in or out to maybe make a "Base Height adjustment"?

Just a thought.

B
Attachments
16072012175.jpg
SDCase.jpg
SDCase.jpg (30.22 KiB) Viewed 788 times
A chicken is one egg's way of becoming others
User avatar
Collector Inspector
Posts: 4182
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:32 am
Location: Perth Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Collector Inspector »

I Hear Silence

B
A chicken is one egg's way of becoming others
User avatar
Hugz
Posts: 3282
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:41 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Unrestored 102 SD (Naval?)

Post by Hugz »

No washer just the..... BUSH...... :lol:
Post Reply